5fish:
Post-mortem forensics are going to prove nothing. How do you determine that this body was killed in the course of battle or killed as a wanton act of murder?
It was a vicious fight and there are legitimate reasons for the ferocity. I usually go to the statistics. Rarely is a 50 percent KIA recorded for a defending force. For me, the difference between a 30 percent KIA and a 50 percent KIA is evidence of some wanton killing. If one wishes to define wanton killing as a massacre, so be it. If one would rather define it as heat of battle, so be it. To me, many more were killed than necessary to gain control of the fort.
There are persuasive reasons for the overkill, but it remains that many were unnecessarily killed. A massacre? That might be an extreme description, but it works for me.
ole
The most accepted calculation is for a minimum of 226 dead on the Union side. That was for a force of 557 white and black troops on the Union side. In recent years, some efforts have been made to build that number up to about 631, and to claim the 70+ added men were all killed. You'll note that even if that were to be found true, the killed would still be below 50%.
Tim